Re: routing setup question

1997-04-25 Thread Craig Sanders
On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, Benedikt Eric Heinen wrote: > > > On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Jens B. Jorgensen wrote: > > [ all my config info deleted ] > > Let me comment: Except for one minor flaw, those configs are working. The > only flaw in there was, that in the setup for icemark, the route to > firefranc

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-17 Thread Benedikt Eric Heinen
> > On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Jens B. Jorgensen wrote: > [ all my config info deleted ] Let me comment: Except for one minor flaw, those configs are working. The only flaw in there was, that in the setup for icemark, the route to firefranc needs to be a host route (root add -host ${FIREFRANC} eth0) in

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-17 Thread Jens B. Jorgensen
Craig Sanders wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Jens B. Jorgensen wrote: > [ all my config info deleted ] > > The only problem with this is that neither machine will be able to > communicate directly with other machines on the 193.135.252/24 network - > with a netmask of 255.255.255.0 they will

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-17 Thread Craig Sanders
On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Jens B. Jorgensen wrote: > > > > lisa.thenet.ch icemark.thenet.ch firefranc > > > > ppp0193.135.252.75 193.135.252.47 > > > > eth0192.168.101.1 192.168.101.2 > > [...] > > > > The new setup should look like: > > > >

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-15 Thread Jens B. Jorgensen
Benedikt Eric Heinen wrote: > > > My first question would be are these valid IP addresses or did you pick > > arbitrary addresses for your local systems? > As that question was asked by several people, the 192.168.101.x addresses > are arbritrary addresses for my own subnet. The 193.135.252.47 and

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-15 Thread Rick
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 15-Apr-97 Benedikt Eric Heinen wrote: >are arbritrary addresses for my own subnet. The 193.135.252.47 and >193.135.252.179 were addresses assigned to me by my ISP. Both are routed >from his machine, so if I try a traceroute from icemark to >firefrancs new add

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-15 Thread Benedikt Eric Heinen
> My first question would be are these valid IP addresses or did you pick > arbitrary addresses for your local systems? As that question was asked by several people, the 192.168.101.x addresses are arbritrary addresses for my own subnet. The 193.135.252.47 and 193.135.252.179 were addresses assigne

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-15 Thread Jason Costomiris
On Mon, 14 Apr 1997, Benedikt Eric Heinen wrote: > The new setup should look like: > > ISP My systems > > lisa.thenet.ch icemark.thenet.ch firefranc.thenet.ch > <--- ppp0 ---> <--- eth0 ---> > 193.135.252.75 193.135.252.47

Re: routing setup question

1997-04-14 Thread Jens B. Jorgensen
Benedikt Eric Heinen wrote: > > Hi there, > > I've got a problem setting up routing for two linux boxes connected to > the Internet. > > The setup used to be like this: > > ISP My systems > > lisa.thenet.ch icemark.thenet.ch firefranc > ppp0193.135.252.

routing setup question

1997-04-14 Thread Benedikt Eric Heinen
Hi there, I've got a problem setting up routing for two linux boxes connected to the Internet. The setup used to be like this: ISP My systems lisa.thenet.ch icemark.thenet.ch firefranc ppp0193.135.252.75 193.135.252.47 eth0192.168